Class,

If I was hired based on “cleaning up” a sports program that had a tainted past, in order to
begin to alleviate the current state of disarray I would immediately begin with publishing my
intent for the specified program. This would allow me to establish a new cultural mindset within
the organization and reestablish the very purpose for existing as a team. This is essential because
we could only be successful in a team sport if we are competent, committed, and have a shared
sense of purpose as a team. Although I feel my actions would be dictated by the true sense of the
situation and the determination of the staff and players; I would establish a common goal that
also discusses values, ethics and morale responsibility to self, team and community.
Simultaneously, I would begin to implement all three aspects discussed in this week’s
readings. To emphasize output control under my watch, I would stress brilliance in the basics.
This will realign my athletes with the fundamentals of the sports and they will be able to increase
speed with proficiency. They will start by seeing quick tangible results, assuming they are
worthy collegiate athletes, giving them the quick victories need to show proof of positive
tangible results. This will ultimately lead to increased productivity on the field and adaptation of
more complex technique. Consequently, poor performance and attitude would also be tangibly
measured and dealt with initially with time consuming but thoughtful extra practice. In the event
of failure and low determination among the team. No one would be encouraged to quit or give
up, ever.
I would behave exactly as I would want my players to behave. Courtesies such as “yes
ma’am” and “yes sir” would become infectious and wide spread. I would expect my staff and
team to reciprocate every good deed that was done for or to them two fold. Manning stated “the
more people feel a part of a particular group, the more likely they are to adopt the values and
behaviors that are associated with that group” (Manning, 2009) with regards to influencing
environmental change; I feel the same statement can apply to any group or club. As we become
more cohesive as a team and understanding of our collective pursuits I would further establish
key leaders within the organization to handle smaller routine tasks likely outside of their skillset
in order to promote creativity and critical thinking. This would enact some of the principles
associated with the clan control dimension and, with supervision, produce positive outcomes that
encourage leadership role adaptations and teamwork.
Jim
Ketchen, D., & Short, J. (n.d.). Executing strategy through organizational design. In Strategic
Management: Evaluation and Execution (1.0th ed., pp. 9.2-9.3).
Manning, C. (2009). The psychology of sustainable behavior. Retrieved from Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency website: https://www.google.com/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=2ahUKEwiEgbTQ4KvlAhUSc98K
HZFLC8cQFjAJegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.macalester.edu
%2F~cmanning%2FResearchProjects
%2FPsychologySustainableBehaviorReport.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1Z7-
PEMbPrndSzdUoWY9fE
Dr.,
I do agree with your philosophy on establishing a slightly abrasive and more aggressive
approach during the initial introductory time period. That is exactly my style. I believe that the
people that are most praise worthy are exactly the ones that gave you a harder time and didn’t let
you quit. They are the ones that demanded results and didn’t let you get away with the small
things. It is not the coach that lets you come to practice when you want and definitely not the guy
who lets you “sit this one out” when you were tired. People don’t remember that guy and rarely
respect him. Often enough athletes and similar people of most kind of groups need guidance and
a little rigidity in their lives. In some cases this is exactly why certain people join groups like this
to be given a purpose and a challenge.
Jim
Rick,
I have heard of your methodical approach to being the new guy in town when you
reference the 30 to 45 day rule. I thought it was a great adaptation to supervision and
acclimatization to new surroundings until I actually tried this. In keeping with the Doctor’s
comments this week, I must agree that it is important to address some smaller issues
immediately. I realized this first hand after I was assigned a new position in a different company
and had no idea what this company did. Know it or not I was here to lead, coach and manage it.
After exactly two weeks of being there I still knew very little about the place unless I pulled
information from the very mouths of my colleagues. This let me know that there was a large
communication gap in the very first line of defense for this company and only left my
imagination run to what else was “broken.” I quickly established a weekly sync meeting to plan
for the short and long term operations and a daily email product that revisited our short term
goals and tasking reminders.
My approach is difficult, which is why I feel it isn’t popular but is sometimes necessary.
Making drastic changes to schedules and being an interruption is silly and dangerous but specific
practical changes can be eye-opening. With my flexible leadership style, I encourage
communication and input from anyone that has it. This I feel would be essential to early changes
before the 30 day marker. If you include the team and make them a part of the changes, your
plan has a better chance of being adoption by the group. Their ideas and opinions do matter. In
my specific case my variation of mandatory clan control worked out exceedingly well for
everyone and my company is now the best of four for three years running in every category.
Jim
Michael,
I am on target with you and your idea to set a new tone, but I would be wary about trying
to destroying a culture. Especially in sports, probably even more so in collegiate sports, the
group’s culture is likely built around time honored customs, courtesies, traditions and
achievements that no one could ever take away. This will surely be an unpopular decision in due
time. From my experience whether it’s taking charge of a new “bad” group or trying to
understand why a good group suddenly went downhill, you will likely have to weed out the
“cancer” or “bad apple (s)” and reinvigorate your team versus destroy the culture.
Lots of times I see the “bad apples” make poor decisions and because of their
unwillingness to correct it, they inherently become the “cancer” that spoils and infects. I read lots
of leadership books and I can’t remember where this came from but it could also be the fact that
a new join to the group or team simply refuses to adopt the group’s culture and creates the rift
that has become the catalyst for the downfall of the team (Unkown, n.d.). The more recent
shenanigans of Antonio Brown and his helmet fiasco, depending on the way you see it, could be
a good example. He refused to change and the company, the National Football League, left him
behind after multiple attempts to persuade him to adapt to the new rules, which had many
options in itself. Good post though, you make a very compelling argument for your method of
fixing a poor performance and questionable behavior and I am all on for it in every way you
spoke of.
Jim
(Unkown, n.d.).